Case law

Dressel Associates, Inc. v. John A. Welsch Real Estate Appraisers, Inc.

429 Pa. Super. 379 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 18, 1993

After carefully reviewing the Dressel-Rueger agreement, we conclude that neither party expressly intended to establish third party benefits in favor of the appraiser. … Paragraph 3 of the agreement of sale, when read in context with the entire agreement, is clearly an attempt by Rueger and Dressel to define their corresponding rights inter se.

Maketa v. Butcher

158 Pa. Super. 519 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 13, 1945

Whether this use was allowed pursuant to an arrangement made before the accident does not clearly appear. … The findings of fact supported by sufficient competent evidence are immunized against .judicial attack, but conclusions of law are reviewable upon appeal to the courts. Krchmar v. Oakland Beach Co., 155 Pa.

Pridgen v. Parker Hannifin Corp.

2009 Pa. Super. 90 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 15, 2009

Jones, 515 U.S. 304, 310 , 115 S.Ct. 2151 , 132 L.Ed.2d 238 (1995) (holding, in the context of the assertion of a qualified immunity defense, that a trial court’s summary judgment order that merely determines that the pretrial … Jones, supra, and the standards enumerated above by our Supreme Court in Appellant’s prior appeal, Appellants have not established that the order in question is: 1) separable from and collateral to the main cause of action

Estate of Pew

409 Pa. Super. 417 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 1, 1991

In order for a child born out of wedlock to establish a right to participate in the distribution of the remainder of a trust to be distributed to the children of the deceased father, the claimant must establish by clear and … These certified records, which were neither antiquated nor insufficient, clearly established that Walter C. Pew had type 0 blood. The appellant’s own admission established that she had type AB blood.

Commonwealth v. Leib

403 Pa. Super. 223 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 14, 1991

However, the testimony at trial established the following uncontroverted facts. … When considered in light of our case law on the subject, this evidence clearly was sufficient to establish that the laboratory, equipment, procedures, and personnel employed to test appellant’s blood were qualified and approved

Preiser v. Rosenzweig

418 Pa. Super. 341 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 29, 1992

A demurrer should be sustained only in cases where the plaintiff has clearly failed to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Eckell v. Wilson, 409 Pa.Super. 132 , 597 A.2d 696 (1991). … If he did not, the determination is not binding upon him and judicial immunity is inapplicable.

Keystone Dedicated Logistics, Inc. v. JGB Enterprises, Inc.

2013 Pa. Super. 225 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 6, 2013

A document itself qualifies as hearsay when it contains such hearsay statements. See, e.g., Rissi v. Cappella, 918 A.2d 131 , 138- *13 139 (Pa.Super.2007) (“[T]he document was clearly hearsay.”). … Anything qualifying as hearsay is inadmissible as evidence unless an exception applies. Pa.R.E. 802.

Synthes USA Sales, LLC v. Harrison

2013 Pa. Super. 324 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 24, 2013

Simply, the moving party must establish a prima facie right to relief. Shenango Valley Osteopathic Hosp. v. … The mere possibility that the claim might be defeated does not preclude a finding of probable success if the evidence clearly satisfies the essential prerequisites of the cause of action. Stilp v.

Castor v. RUFFING

178 Pa. Super. 124 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 24, 1955

Superior Ct. 69 , 8 A. 2d 491 , cited by appellants, do not overrule or qualify the Griffin case. … The opinion of the doctor was clearly admissible. Cf. Heinold v. *132 Pittsburgh Brass Mfg. Co., 149 Pa. Superior Ct. 409 , 27 A. 2d 267 .

Shick v. Shirey

456 Pa. Super. 668 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 19, 1997

SAYLOR, J., dissenting: As the majority notes, an employee cannot succeed on a public-policy-based wrongful discharge claim unless he or she can establish “a violation of a clearly mandated public policy which ‘strikes at … Thus, “[t]he workmen’s compensation law has deprived some of rights in exchange for surer benefits, immunized some, to make possible resources to benefit many.... ” Kline v. Arden H.

Harris v. Toys" R" Us-Penn, Inc.

2005 Pa. Super. 281 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 3, 2005

Moreover, our standard of review is very narrow; we may only reverse upon a showing that the trial court clearly abused its discretion or committed an error of law. … Deposition of Tiffany Harris, 2/15/02, at 12-14. ¶ 11 Appellant contends that this testimony clearly establishes that the declarant was an on-duty employee of Toys “R” Us. Appellant’s Brief at 12-13.

Commonwealth v. Jamison

195 Pa. Super. 304 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 15, 1961

He offered other evidence to establish his alibi. In addition he called one Arnold Brown who had been convicted and had completed his sentence for being the “lookout” in connection with the same robbery. … At no time did any one of the Avitnesses falter, qualify or indicate uncertainty in his identification.

Com. v. Wallace, J.

244 A.3d 1261 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 8, 2021

In addition, we note that the facts and circumstances established by the Commonwealth need not preclude every possibility of innocence. … The Commonwealth’s evidence clearly established that a brawl occurred in which defendant and Williams were participants. This, however, does not in itself demonstrate the existence of a conspiracy.

Treser v. General State Authority

190 Pa. Super. 490 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 16, 1959

Although there has been some confusion in the cases, it is now well settled that even if the appellee were entitled to a sovereign’s immunity from liability of in *493 terest and if there had been no statutory requirement … It should be noted that the statute clearly says, “as part of the just compensation” so that the only reason interest was provided was to compensate for the detention of the money by delay in payment. *494 It certainly is

Moffitt, C. v. Miller, C.

302 A.3d 1219 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 18, 2023

The standard jury instructions provided by the court adequately, accurately, and clearly stated the law. There also was no prejudice suffered by Plaintiff for the court’s omitted charges. … Moreover, “a jury verdict is set aside for inadequacy when it appears to have been the product of passion, prejudice, partiality, or corruption, or where it clearly appears from uncontradicted evidence that the amount

Commonwealth v. Hankins

261 Pa. Super. 264 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 22, 1978

To qualify for P.C.H.A. relief, a petitioner must establish, inter alia, that “the error resulting in his conviction and sentence has not been finally litigated or waived.” 4 An issue is deemed waived if: “(1) The petitioner … Appellant’s contentions are, without exception, addressed to the validity of his plea, and as such would clearly be cognizable on direct appeal. Commonwealth v. Greer, 457 Pa. 646 , 326 A.2d 338 (1974); Commonwealth v.

Jenkins v. Hospital of Medical College of Pennsylvania

401 Pa. Super. 604 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 31, 1991

While these causes of action could have been stated more clearly, they have been stated clearly enough. Appellees, citing Hull v. … (“Act 152”), established sovereign immunity by statute. Section 5 of the Act expressed the legislature’s intention to apply the Act to claims that had arisen before its promulgation.

Savini Appeal

204 Pa. Super. 453 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 16, 1964

[area] shall continue to be governed as before said incorporation until the first Monday of January following the municipal election next succeeding occurring at least ninety days after the issuance of the final decree establishing … Section 205 of The Borough Code could not state more clearly the time when an area becomes an incorporated borough.

Oatess v. Norris

431 Pa. Super. 599 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 26, 1994

. § 1983 , a party must establish two essential elements: 1) that the conduct complained of was committed by a person acting under color of state law, and 2) that the conduct deprived the party of rights, privileges or immunities … Such a claim is clearly sufficient to meet the above-referenced requirements. See Bounds v. Smith, 430 U.S. 817, 821-29 , 97 S.Ct. 1491, 1494-99 , 52 L.Ed.2d 72 (1977).

Long v. 130 MKT. ST. GIFT & NOVELTY, ETC.

294 Pa. Super. 383 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 14, 1982

Appellants clearly intended to try to establish the statewide community standard based on the availability and marketability of pornographic materials in other parts of the Commonwealth. … We find no abuse of the chancellor’s discretion in refusing to qualify Dry as an expert witness.